MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3055740745 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2020.305825

Frequent Cannabis Use and Cessation of Injection of Opioids, Vancouver, Canada, 2005–2018

2020· article· en· W3055740745 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hudson Reddon, Kora DeBeck, M. Eugenia Socías, Stephanie Lake, Huiru Dong, Mohammad Karamouzian, Kanna Hayashi, Thomas Kerr, M‐J Milloy

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use
FundersNational Institute on Drug Abuse
KeywordsCannabisMedicineHazard ratioConfidence intervalSmoking cessationOpioidProportional hazards modelInjection drug useDemographyEnvironmental healthPsychiatryInternal medicineDrugDrug injection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives. To evaluate the impact of frequent cannabis use on injection cessation and injection relapse among people who inject drugs (PWID). Methods. Three prospective cohorts of PWID from Vancouver, Canada, provided the data for these analyses. We used extended Cox regression analysis with time-updated covariates to analyze the association between cannabis use and injection cessation and injection relapse. Results. Between 2005 and 2018, at-least-daily cannabis use was associated with swifter rates of injection cessation (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03, 1.30). A subanalysis revealed that this association was only significant for opioid injection cessation (AHR = 1.26; 95% CI = 1.12, 1.41). At-least-daily cannabis use was not significantly associated with injection relapse (AHR = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.95, 1.23). Conclusions. We observed that at-least-daily cannabis use was associated with a 16% increase in the hazard rate of injection cessation, and this effect was restricted to the cessation of injection opioids. This finding is encouraging given the uncertainty surrounding the impact of cannabis policies on PWID during the ongoing opioid overdose crisis in many settings in the United States and Canada.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207